JUDGEMENT
The applicant, Lydia Aklamanu, was until 1st September, 2011, a Magistrate at the Family and Juvenile Court ‘C’ at the Ministries in Accra. Following a petition made against her by one Patience Okoe, a three member committee of Inquiry was appointed to investigate the allegations made against her.
The committee after its deliberations, in which the applicant fully participated; and was ably aided by her lawyer made certain unfavourable findings in the nature of impropriety against her. She has a copy of the committee’s report and it does appear to me that she is not aversed to the proceedings of the committee and its conclusion.
The committee dutifully submitted its report to Her Ladyship the Chief Justice who in utmost obedience to the 1992 Constitution referred the matter to the Judicial Council for consideration and action.
At its meeting on 30th August 2011, the Judicial Council after exhaustively and passionately deliberating on the committee’s report, accepted the findings of the committee that the applicant grossly misconducted herself in the performance of her official duties. The judicial council therefore passed a resolution to dismiss the applicant from the Judicial Service, thus relieving her of her position as a magistrate.
The decision of the Judicial Council was communicated to her by a letter dated 1st September, 2011. The caption of the said letter was the word “dismissal” written in bold letters.
In the said dismissal letter, which was signed by no less a person than the Honourable Lady Chief Justice of the Republic of Ghana, it did indicate for the attention and information of the applicant in paragraph 6 thereof that:
“Upon a resolution supported by votes of two-thirds of all members of the Judicial Council, it was decided that you should be dismissed from the Judicial Service for accepting bribe to influence your conduct in a case pending before you.”
In coming to this conclusion or arriving at this decision, which the applicant might have found unpalatable, the Judicial Council acted in absolute compliance with Article 151(1) of the 1992 Constitution. The said Article provides:
“151. Removal of judicial officers.
(1) A person holding a judicial office may be removed from office by the Chief Justice on grounds only of stated misbehaviour, incompetence or inability to perform his functions arising from infirmity of body or mind and upon a resolution supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of all the member
